- CAS 2016/A/4417 - Valentin Balakhnichev v. IAAF
- CAS 2016/A/4419 - Alexei Melnikov v. IAAF
- CAS 2016/A/4420 - Papa Massata Diack v. IAAF & Ethics Commission of the IAAF
Related cases:
- ARAF 2014 ARAF vs Liliya Shobukhova
April 9, 2014 - CAS 2014_A_3662 IAAF vs ARAF & Liliya Shobukhova & WADA - Settlement
July 29, 2015 - CAS 2016_A_4487 IAAF vs Alexey Melnikov
April 7, 2017 - IAAF 2016 IAAF vs Valentin Balakhnichev, Alexei Melnikov, Gabriel Dollé & Papa Massata Diack
January 7, 2016
In September 2015 the IAAF Ethics Commission has reported multiple violations of the IAAF’s Code of Ethics against 4 athletics senior officials for their involvement in the suppression of findings of anti-doping violations by the female Russian marathon runner Lilya Shobukhova and the exaction of monies from her as the price to pay for enabling her, by virtue of such suppression, to compete in athletics competitions.
The Athlete Shobukhova was charged by the IAAF for an anti-doping rule violation on the basis of abnormalities in her blood profile compiled in the course of the IAAF Athlete Biological Passport programme. On 29 July 2015 in a settlement (CAS 2014/A/3662) a 3 year and 2 month period of ineligibility was accepted by the Athlete Shobukhova.
The Athlete provided substantial assistance to WADA and the IAAF in discovering and bringing forward these multiple violations committed by the senior officials. On 24 August 2015 because of her substantial assistance WADA granted the Athlete a reduction of seven months on the sanction.
The involved and accused athletics senior officials were:
- a.) Valentin Balakhnichev (VB), former President of the All-Russia Athletic Federation (ARAF) and Honorary Treasurer of the IAAF;
- b.) Alexei Melnikov (AM), former Senior ARAF Coach for long distance walkers and runners;
- c.) Gabriel Dollé (GD), former Director of the IAAF’s Anti-Doping Department; and
- d.) Papa Massata Diack (PMD), former marketing consultant to the IAAF and son of the IAAF’s then President, Lamine Diack (LD).
On 7 January 2016 after a 20 month investigation into corruption, blackmail and extortion the Panel of the IAAF Ethics Commission concluded that the alleged breaches are made out.
The Commission Panel considered in the light of its findings that VB, AM and PMD should be banned for life from any further involvement in any way in the sport of track and field; any lesser sanction would not meet the gravity of their offences.
In GD’s case such ban was also appropriate but in his case for 5 years only; his sins were those of omission, not commission. The IAAF Ethics Commission considered that it would be appropriate also to mark the gravity of their offences by imposing fines.
Hereafter in January 2016 the athletics senor officials Valentin Balakhnichev (VB), Alexei Melnikov (AM) and Papa Massata Diack (PMD) appealed the IAAF Ethics Commission decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). They requested the CAS Panel to set aside the IAAF Ethics decision of 7 January 2016 and to acquit them of all the charges.
Both VB and AM argued that in First Instance the standard of evidence had not been respected as the IAAF Ethics Commission Panel based a large part of its ruling on hearsay evidence, not supported by any reliable facts of documents. They disputed the witness statements and evidence provided by the Athlete Lilya Shobukhova and her husband.
PMD asserted that the IAAF disciplinary proceedings were irregular and, therefore should be annulled. He argued that the standard of evidence had not been respected and the IAAF Ethics Commission disregardes PMD’s right to the presumption of innocence.
He denied his involvement in the suppression of findings of anti-doping violations by the Athlete Shobukhova and the exaction of monies from her as the price to pay for enabling her, by virtue of such suppression, to compete in athletics competitions.
In this case the CAS Panel holds that any possible procedural deficiency or violation that might have affected the IAAF disciplinary proceedings has been cured, with no need to address the procedural grievances raised by the Appellants with respect to these IAAF proceedings. Besides, the Panel cannot see that the IAAF proceedings were unfair.
The Panel deems that there can be no misunderstanding about the facts that the IAAF Ethics Commission Panel considered proven and agrees with the IAAF Ethics Commission Panel's qualification of those facts in the Appealed Decision. Consequently, the Panel - in majority with regard to Mr Diack - concludes that on the evidence adduced, the charges against all three Appellants have been established beyond a reasonable doubt, that the sanctions imposed for breach of the said Codes in respectively June and July 2012 and March 2014 should be upheld, and that the Appeals should be dismissed.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 21 August 2017 that:
1.) The respective appeals filed by Mr Valentin Balakhnichev, Mr Alexei Melnikov, and Mr Papa Massata Diack on 26 January 2016 against the decision of the IAAF Ethics Commission dated 7 January 2016 are dismissed.
2.) The decision of the IAAF Ethics Commission dated 7 January 2016 is confirmed.
3.) The award is pronounced without costs, except for the Court Office fees of CHF 1,000 (one thousand Swiss Francs) each paid individually by Mr Valentin Balakhnichev, Mr Alexei Melnikov, and Mr Papa Massata Diack, which is retained by the CAS.
4.) Mr Valentin Balakhnichev, Mr Alexei Melnikov, and Mr Papa Massata Diack are each individually ordered to pay the International Association of Athletics Federations an amount of CHF 7,500 as contribution towards the expenses incurred in connection with these arbitration proceedings.
5.) All other motions or prayers for relief are dismissed.
